Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
Tomes' paper says allegorizing is "redundant," and page 6 says, "Hence scholars assert that allegory’s “role, hermeneutically speaking, is parasitic,” it extracts its significance from the rest of the Bible, yet contributes nothing in return. I'm not sure if I totally agree with this assertion. Certain points in scripture are stressed redundantly for emphasis, using plain words, types, pictures, prophecies, etc. Allegorizing, thus, enhances the message in richer terms. I should think that the strictest of literalism would preclude the church from even the singing of songs and writing of commentaries.
|
Yes, this is something else I find poorly defined or expressed. I would agree that Allegories role is not to add meaning but to extract it from the rest of the Bible. I disagree that this is "parasitic. Instead I would say that a good allegory, or a good parable can convey a lot of truth in a very brief way. For example, you could ask a bunch of rabbi's to define "who my neighbor is" or you could ask a bunch of lawyers or scribes to do this. I doubt any of them could come up with a more elegant, concise and helpful definition as the Lord did in His parable of the Good Samaritan.